In 2023, the appellants, Arvin Dang and Kristy Morgan, filed an application for class action in the Supreme Court of British Columbia alleging that the RCMP’s policies and tactics in enforcing an injunction order protecting logging activity in the Fairy Creek area violated the Charter rights of the proposed class members. On of the main issues outlined in the claim is the RCMP’s unlawful use of exclusion zones to restrict movement in the area, something BCCLA staff counsel, Veronica Martisius, experienced firsthand when she visited the area in 2021.

In 2025, the Supreme Court of British Columbia dismissed the application for class certification on the basis that it failed to satisfy three of the requirements for certification under section 4(1) of the Class Proceedings Act: stating an identifiable class, identifying common issues, and establishing that a class proceeding is the preferable procedure for the fair and efficient resolution of the common issues. With respect to the latter, the Court suggested that it would be better if each person who had their rights violated brought their own case, either by suing the RCMP, or by filing a complaint to the RCMP’s oversight body the Civilian Review Complaints Commission (CRCC).

BCCLA intervened to urge the Court of Appeal to take a purposeful approach to assessing whether proposed alternative procedures can address any relevant substantive access to justice barriers. Substantive access to justice is only possible where a just and effective remedy exists. In a proposed class action seeking damages for Charter violations, an alternative procedure can only provide access to justice – and thus serve as a preferable procedure to class action – if it can lead to a remedy that meets the compensation, vindication and deterrence purposes of Charter damages.

Viewed through this lens, police oversight bodies have limited ability to provide just and effective remedies for Charter claims. For instance, the CRCC can only issue non-binding recommendations and it cannot order compensation for wrongdoing.

It is BCCLA’s opinion that when it comes to holding the RCMP accountable for widespread misconduct including Charter violations in the context of mass protests, police oversight bodies can only go so far. Access to justice therefore demands that every option for meaningful remedy remain on the table.